Gryaznov Mikhail Petrovich. The initial phase of the development of Scythian-Siberian cultures

Soviet historical science suffered an irreparable loss. On August 18, 1984, at the age of 82, the largest specialist in the field of archeology of Siberia, Kazakhstan and Central Asia, Doctor of Historical Sciences, Honored Scientist of the RSFSR, laureate of the USSR State Prize, Mikhail Petrovich Gryaznov, died.

M. P. Gryaznov was born on March 13, 1902 in the town of Berezov, Tobolsk province. (now the village of Berezovo. Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug, Tyumen Region) in the family of an inspector of a city four-year school.

In 1912-1919. He studied at the 2nd Tomsk Real School, then entered Tomsk University in the natural sciences department of the Faculty of Physics and Mathematics. In the summer of 1920, on the banks of the Yenisei, he accidentally fell into an archaeological expedition led by S. A. Teploukhov, a teacher at Tomsk University. From that time on, M. P. Gryaznov’s scientific interests were determined in the fields of archaeology, anthropology and ethnography. Simultaneously with his studies at the university, M.P. Gryaznov in 1920-1922. worked as a preparator in the geography department of Tomsk University, and annually took part in archaeological expeditions.

In 1922 he transferred to Leningrad University. During the day he studied, and in the evening he worked as a registrar at RAIMK (1922-1925). In 1925, Mikhail Petrovich left the university, having completed three courses in the anthropological department of the Faculty of Physics and Mathematics. He began working as a researcher in the Ethnographic Department of the State Russian Museum. Conducting independent excavations (in 1924 near Tomsk and in 1925 in the upper reaches of the Ob River), M. P. Gryaznov published his first scientific work, prepared a second for publication, and read a number of scientific reports on the archeology of Southern Siberia. Already the first scientific works of Mikhail Petrovich were distinguished by a striking combination of depth of analysis of the problems raised and laconic presentation. They immediately attracted the attention of scientists.

In the period from 1925 to 1933, M. P. Gryaznov simultaneously worked as a research assistant in the Ethnographic Department of the State Russian Museum and at the State Historical Museum. His scientific interests at that time were focused on the study of monuments mainly from the Bronze Age and Early Iron Age in the south of Siberia and Kazakhstan: field research was closely connected with the Altai Territory, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan. The most important result of Mikhail Petrovich’s work was the establishment of the chronological sequence of the ancient cultures of Altai (Ancient cultures of Altai. Materials for the study of Siberia, 1930, issue 2) and the clarification of the territorial division of Bronze Age cultures in Siberia and Kazakhstan (Burials of the Bronze Age in Western Kazakhstan. - B book: Cossacks, 1927,
issue II.: Kazakhstan center of bronze culture. - In the book: Cossacks, 1930, issue. III).

The field research of M.P. Gryaznov on the study of the Scythian period in the Altai Mountains is very important for the ancient history of our country. During excavations of large mounds preserved in permafrost (Shibe, 1927; Pazyryk, 1929), vivid monuments of the culture and art of the “early nomads” were obtained. At GAIMK M.P. Gryaznov joined a thematic group that studied the problem of “The Emergence of Nomadic Cattle Breeding.” This topic fascinated Mikhail Petrovich for many years. In 1939, he first formulated the definition of the era of the early nomads as a special period in the history of Eurasia (layout “History of the USSR”, parts I, II), and this definition entered the specialized literature for a long time.

In 1937, M.P. Gryaznov began working at the State Hermitage Museum, and from 1939 to June 1941, he was a senior researcher at the Institute of Humanities and Mathematics of the USSR Academy of Sciences. During these years, the researcher completed the topic of studying the monuments of the Bronze Age and early nomads. The first book about the Pazyryk Kurgan appeared (L, 1937) and a large handwritten work was completed, published later in an abbreviated form (First Pazyryk Kurgan. L, 1950).

During the days of the Great Patriotic War, from August 1941 to 1945, the curator of the museum M.P. Gryaznov was evacuated with the Hermitage valuables to Sverdlovsk, where he continued to develop methods for studying ancient tools based on traces of their work (traceology) and problems of the history of art of early ko
people of Siberia. In 1942, he excavated Paleolithic and Early Bronze Age sites on the river. Chusovoy. In January 1945, Mikhail Petrovich defended his Ph.D. thesis on the topic “Burials of the Bronze Age in Western Kazakhstan,” and in June of the same year he received the academic degree of Doctor of Historical Sciences, presenting to the academic council of the Institute of History and Mathematics of the USSR Academy of Sciences a handwritten monograph “Pazyryk - the burial of a tribal leader on Altai".

Returning to Leningrad in the fall of 1945, M. P. Gryaznov began working at the Institute of the History of Material Culture of the USSR Academy of Sciences (first part-time in 1945-1947, and from 1948 as a senior researcher). In 1946-1954. Mikhail Petrovich carried out excavations in the area of ​​the village. Big river on the Upper Ob. Here previously unknown new cultures were discovered and a chronological scale of cultures of the forest-steppe zone of Southern Siberia was established, starting from the Bronze Age to the 13th century. n. e. On this basis, it was possible to recreate the contours of the history of the forest belt of Southern Siberia, to show, in particular, that there were no early nomads on the Upper Ob, and that this territory was inhabited by sedentary tribes.

During these same years, M.P. Gryaznov carefully studied the problems of the formation and development of cultures of the Bronze Age and Scythian times in Kazakhstan and Southern Siberia. The researcher devoted a number of works to this topic (“The First Pazyryk Kurgan”, 1950; “Ancient Art of Altai”, 1958; “The Ancient Monuments of the Heroic Epic in Southern Siberia”, 1961), firmly included in the reference books of specialists not only in our country, but and abroad.

The works of M.P. Gryaznov are characterized by subtlety and accuracy of observation, great attention to issues of technology and everyday use of ancient things, which allowed the researcher to notice many phenomena that often did not attract attention. Mikhail Petrovich was a master of extracting maximum information from every ancient thing. These qualities gave him the opportunity to restore the fate of the ancient population of our country in completely new aspects and with such details that, it seemed, were not available to archeology. With special attention and competence, Mikhail Petrovich developed issues of the economic and everyday history of ancient society, not leaving social relations and ideology unattended.

The pinnacle of M. P. Gryaznov’s scientific heritage is his book “Southern Siberia” (series “Archaeology of the World.” “Sudsibirien Archaeologia Mundi”, published in 1969 and 1970 simultaneously in English, French and German in Stuttgart, Munich, Geneva and Paris) and “Arzhan - a royal mound of early Scythian times” (L., 1980). For these works, M.P. Gryaznov was awarded the title of laureate of the USSR State Prize in 1983.

The monograph “Southern Siberia” became a kind of result of the author’s many years of work on the archeology of southern Siberia of the Metal Age. To a large extent, the material for it was obtained as a result of numerous archaeological excavations by the author and his collaborators. The main content of the book is the archeology and cultural history of the ancient tribes of Sayan-Altai in the Bronze and Early Iron Ages, that is, from the beginning of the development of productive forms of economy through the Scythian time inclusive (from the 3rd millennium to the 1st century BC).

The history of the development of ancient cultures of one of the geographically, historically and culturally most important regions of the Asian part of the USSR is examined in three main sections: the Chalcolithic or Copper Age, the developed Bronze Age, and the era of the “early nomads.” Each section provides a general overview of the main sources on the basis of which the level of development of basic industries (tools, metalworking, farming) and the resulting form of household and economic life (house, household utensils, food, clothing) are reconstructed; then the family form and social system are reconstructed and, finally, in connection with all this, the features of the worldview of society, reflected in the fine, ornamental and other arts.

M.P. Gryaznov convincingly shows that the historical process in Sayan-Altai was similar in general terms to the process of development of other tribes of the steppe strip of Eurasia. The population of the steppes experienced, in general synchronously, although with some deviations, the same stages in the development of their culture.

The Eneolithic era (end of the 3rd - first half of the 2nd millennium BC) is characterized in the work using the example of monuments of the Afanasyevskaya and Okunevskaya cultures, which developed on the autochthonous basis of the previous cultural development of this region. The Bronze Age was recreated thanks to many years of systematic study of the monuments of the Andronovo and Karasuk cultures (mid-2nd millennium - 8th century BC). These monuments, especially Karasuk ones, have been thoroughly studied by the author; two main stages of cultural development are identified - Karasuk proper (XIII-XI centuries BC) and Kamenolozhsky (X-VIII centuries BC), the autochthonous origin of the Karasuk culture is justified.

Radical changes of a socio-economic nature that took place in the life of the population of Southern Siberia in the 1st millennium BC. e., received convincing coverage in the third chapter, dedicated to the history of the “early nomads”. M.P. Gryaznov recreated a dialectical picture of the process of formation and development of the ancient pastoral and agricultural tribes of Southern Siberia, which were both distinctive in culture and at the same time similar in basic features to other tribes of the Great Steppe Belt.

M. P. Gryaznov’s monograph “Southern Siberia,” published in three European languages, presented foreign readers with an excellent example of illuminating the history of the ancient past and high culture of the peoples of Southern Siberia and thereby demonstrated to bourgeois science the best traditions and deep historicism of Soviet historical science.

One of the most striking creative successes of M. P. Gryaznov in his long-term study of the archeology of Southern Siberia was the excavation of the Arzhan mound in Tuva, carried out in 1971-1974. The book “Arzhan - the royal mound of early Scythian times” presents their results. M.P. Gryaznov managed to restore the original appearance of Arzhan, to trace in detail the sequence of the construction of the mound, the performance of the funeral rite and the funeral feast. Thus, a significant event was recorded in the history of Central Asian nomads, which was not reflected in written sources.

The materials obtained as a result of excavations of the Arzhan mound raised a number of fundamental questions about the history of the “Scythian world” and made it possible to rethink the course of historical development in the nomadic world at the dawn of its formation. The monument, consisting of 29 closed archaeological complexes of burials of people and horses, is of exceptional importance for chronology. Based on the entire complex of archaeological features, including serial categories of finds and radiocarbon analysis data, M. P. Gryaznov dated the mound and the “Arzhan stage” he identified - VIII-VII centuries. BC e. According to the researcher, cultures of the Scythian appearance developed in a developed form already in the 8th century. BC e., and the main cultural achievements of this time arose everywhere in the steppes of Eurasia, and did not spread from Iran or the Black Sea region. It is possible that the role of the Sayan-Altai nomads in this process was much more significant than the Scythians themselves. M.P. Gryaznov proposed to call this initial stage in the development of cultures of the Scythian appearance the “Arzhan-Mongorov phase” in the history of the nomadic tribes of the Eurasian steppe belt. Despite the controversial dating, and therefore the interpretation proposed by the author, the book naturally attracted the attention of a wide range of specialists and caused the appearance of a number of printed reviews that highly appreciated the significance of M. P. Gryaznov’s work (reviews by A. P. Okladnikov, Yu. S. Khudyakov , A. I. Terenozhnik, A. A. Askarova).

M.P. Gryaznov was one of the scientists whose works are distinguished by their bright and original research style. His scientific heritage includes over 130 published works. These works were mainly based on the results of first-class excavations by M.P. Gryaznov himself. Since 1946, M.P. Gryaznov led archaeological expeditions working in Siberia (North Altai, Novosibirsk, Irkutsk regions), and from 1955 to 1970 he headed one of the largest expeditions in the USSR - Krasnoyarsk. It can be said without exaggeration that using materials from Southern Siberia, Mikhail Petrovich developed perhaps the most advanced method for the comprehensive study of funerary monuments in our country. He widely used the correlation method to study mass archaeological materials. Many of his works are widely known not only in the Soviet Union, but also abroad.

M.P. Gryaznov was a good teacher. Beginning in 1946, he conducted lecture courses at the Faculty of History of Leningrad University on the archeology of Siberia and traceology, providing training for highly qualified archaeologists. Since 1951, he supervised the training of graduate students at the Department of Archeology of Leningrad State University and at the Leningrad Institute of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR. In the expeditions he led, Mikhail Petrovich instilled in students the skills of working on archaeological objects, the ability to notice and reveal the significance of the smallest features of monuments and thereby increase their historical and educational value.

The scientist’s creative path is characterized not only by his books, but also by his students. Patiently and lovingly raised by M.P. Gryaznov, his students have now become prominent archaeological scientists working fruitfully in the republican academies of sciences, universities and pedagogical universities in our country and abroad.

As a consultant to a number of archaeological institutes in the republics of Central Asia and Kazakhstan, Mikhail Petrovich devoted a lot of attention and energy to training young specialists. Twenty of his students became candidates, and three became doctors of science (G. A. Maksimenko, Y. A. Sher, A. A. Askarov). His student A. A. Askarov was elected corresponding member of the Academy of Sciences of the Uzbek SSR. Under the leadership of M.P. Gryaznov, foreign specialists completed postgraduate studies and successfully defended their dissertations.

The scientific and pedagogical activity of M. P. Gryaznov is closely connected with the Museum of Ethnography of the Peoples of the USSR and the State Hermitage. He was an experienced museum worker. Thanks to his tireless expeditionary activities, the paleoanthropological collections he collected make up a significant part of the collection fund of the Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography of the USSR Academy of Sciences. They are of enormous scientific importance for the study of problems of the racial composition and origin of the peoples of Siberia.

From 1934 to 1936, while in Kirov, M.P. Gryaznov carried out exhibition work at the Kirov Regional Museum of Local History, and in 1936 he became its senior researcher. The result of Mikhail Petrovich’s activities during the “Kirov period” was the systematization of collections, the compilation of inventories and a catalog of them. Studying the funds of the Kirov Regional Museum, M. P. Gryaznov determined the cultural affiliation of some of its archaeological collections and promoted his science.

From 1937 to 1948, M. P. Gryaznov worked as a senior researcher at the State Hermitage, headed the department of Siberia and Kazakhstan in the Department of the History of Primitive Culture, in 1948-1959. he worked there part-time, and since 1960, as a scientific consultant on a voluntary basis. During the Great Patriotic War, his selfless work in saving the treasures of the Hermitage should be especially noted, for which he was awarded the medal “For Valiant Labor in the Great Patriotic War.” In 1954, M. P. Gryaznov was awarded the Order of the Badge of Honor, and later the medal “Veteran of Labor”.

Thanks to the tireless field expeditionary work of Mikhail Petrovich, the Hermitage received a number of most valuable collections. Among them are monuments of the Bronze Age, the famous Pazyryk and Shibinsky mounds, deer stones, and the royal mound of Arzhan. Mikhail Petrovich constantly performed in the Hermitage. Particularly popular among young scientists were lectures on traceological research, devoted to the study of traces, signs of wear, and complex, centuries-old deposits found on ancient objects and tools. The clear excavation methodology introduced by M. P. Gryaznov into field practice makes it possible to extract maximum information from an object and reconstruct all stages of its creation and destruction.

An excellent popularizer of archaeological science, M. P. Gryaznov was an active participant in the LOIA lecture hall, giving popular lectures in Leningrad and beyond. He knew how to find the exact words that convinced his listeners of the importance of the work he was doing and the great importance of archeology for the knowledge of the distant past of human history, which is necessary for every cultured person.

M. P. Gryaznov always combined his research work with teaching, lecturing and administrative activities. Since 1949, he headed the laboratory of cameral processing, and since 1957, the laboratory of archaeological technology of the Institute of Archeology of the USSR Academy of Sciences, for 15 years he headed the sector of Central Asia and the Caucasus in LOIA (1953-1968), and for the last 10 years he headed the Leningrad section of the department field research at the Presidium of the USSR Academy of Sciences.

Mikhail Petrovich Gryaznov entered the archaeological chronicle of our country as an outstanding Soviet archaeologist, one of the leading experts on the ancient history of Siberia and on the cultures left by pastoral tribes in the steppe belt of Eurasia.

His unfailing benevolence, responsiveness, and calm evenness in his manner earned him the well-deserved love and respect of all his colleagues, from seasoned scientists to beginning students.

Avanesova N. A., Kyzlasov L. R.

LIST OF PRINTED WORKS BY M. P. GRYAZNOV
1. Human remains. Technique for collecting and securing bones. A. Collection - Materials on the methods of archaeological technology. RAIMK, 1924, issue. 1.
2. Instructions for measuring the human skull and bones. - Materials on the methods of archaeological technology. RAIMK, 1925, issue. 5 (together with S.I. Rudenko).
3. Biysk antiquity. - Gas. “Star of Altai”, 1925, No. 143.
4. Excavations on the river. Ural.- Nature, 1926, No. 9-10.
5. Prehistoric past of Altai. - Ibid.
6. Stone sculptures of the Minusinsk steppes. - Nature-, 1926, No. I-12 (together with E.R. Schneider).
7. Burials of the Bronze Age in Western Kazakhstan. - In the book: Cossacks. Materials OKISAR. L., 1927, issue. eleven.
8. Description of human bones from ancient graves on the river. Ural.- Ibid.
9. Excavation of a princely grave in Altai.- Man. 1928, No. 2-4.
10. Fiirstengriiber im Altaigebiet.- Wiener Prahist. Z., 1928, XV.
11. Bronze dagger from the lake. Koto-Kol.- In the book: Buryat Studies, 1929, I-II.
12. Ancient sculptures of the Minusinsk steppes. - Materials on ethnography. L.. 1929, vol. IV, issue. 2 (together with E.R. Schneider).
13. Ein Bronzener Dolch mit Widderkopf aus Ost Sibirien.- Arlibus Asiae, 1928-1929. No. 4.
14. Archaeological research in Siberia; Architecture of dwellings and buildings of the natives of Siberia; Aspelin; Geikel; Gorodishcha, SSE, 1929, vol. 1.
15. Pazyryk princely burial in Altai. - Nature, 1929, No. 11.
16. Pazyryk mound in Altai. - Man and Nature, 1929, No. 24.
17. Kazakhstan center of bronze culture. - In the book: Cossacks. OKIS AR materials. L., 1930, issue. 15.
18. Ancient cultures of Altai. - Materials for the study of Siberia. Novosibirsk, 195U, issue. 2.
Same, - Bull. Western-Sib. Islands of Local History, 1930, No. 3-4.
The same (in Japanese). - J. Anthropol. Soc. Tokyo, 1931, XLVI, no. 521.
19. The importance of wood in determining the relative age of ancient structures. niy.- Nature, 1931, No. 2.
20. Stone women. - SSE, 1931, vol. II.
21. Human remains from the cultural layer of Afontova Gora. - Tr. Commission for the Study of the Quaternary Period, 1932, vol. 1.
22. Martin. - SSE, 1932, vol. III.
24. Graphical method for calculating the normal curve of a variation series. - Anthropol. zhurn., 1933, No. 1-2.
24. The Pazirik Burial of Altai.- Amer. J. Archaeol., 1933, v. XXXVII.
25. Boyar writing. - PIMK, 1933, No. 7-8.
26. External signs of monuments and the simplest methods of their registration and protection. - Instructions for registration and protection of monuments of material culture in new buildings / Comp. Artamonov M.I., Gryaznov M.P., Latynin B.A.L.: GAIMK, 1933.
Same. 2nd ed. L.: GAIMK, 1934.
Same. 3rd ed., revised. L.: GAIMK, 1935.
27. Gold of Eastern Kazakhstan and Altai. - Izv. GAIMK, 1935, issue. 110.
28. Pazyryk mound (with parallel French text). L., 1937.
.29. Usun burial grounds on the territory of the Kirghiz SSR, - VDI, 1938, No. 3 (together with M.V. Voevodsky).
30. Bronze Age in Siberia and Kazakhstan; Massagetae and Saki; Usuni; Early nomads of Western Siberia and Kazakhstan. - In the book: History of the USSR (model). Part I-II. M.-L., 1939.
31. Excavations in Altai. - SGE, 1940, issue. I.
32. Siberia and Kazakhstan in the Bronze Age; Culture and art of the early nomads of Siberia. - In the book: State. Hermitage Museum. General guide. L., 1940, issue. 1.
33. Ancient bronze of the Minusinsk steppes: 1. Bronze Celts.-Tr. OIPK (Hermitage). L., 1941, vol. I.
34. Rec. on the book: Bernshtam A.N. Kenkolsky burial ground. L., 1940.- KSIIMK, 1945, issue. XI.
35. Untitled, about the article by S.V. Kiselev “Finds of ancient and Byzantine coins in Altai.” - KSIIMK, 1945, issue. XI.
36. Economy, life and social structure of the early nomads of Altai based on excavations of the Pazyryk mound. - SGE, 1945, issue. III (summary of the report).
37. Technique of graphic reconstruction of the shape and size of pottery. - SA,
1946, vol. VIII.
38. To the method of determining the type of chopping tool. - KSIIMK, 1947, issue. XVI.
39. Monuments of the Mayemiri stage of the era of early nomads in Altai. - KSIIMK,
1947, issue. XVIII.
40. Works of the Altai expedition. - KSIIMK, 1947, issue. XXI (abstract of the report).
41. Siberia and Kazakhstan in the Neolithic and Bronze Age; Culture and art of the early nomads of Siberia. - A short guide to the department of the history of primitive culture. L.: State Publishing House. Hermitage, 1948.
42. Excavations of the Altai expedition in Near Elbany. - KSIIMK, 1949, issue. XXVI.
43. Golden plaque depicting the struggle of animals. - In the book: Treasures of the Hermitage. L., 1949.
44. Minusinsk stone women in connection with some new materials. - SA, 1950, vol. XII.
45. Paleolithic bone tools from Western Siberia. - KSIIMK, 1950, issue. XXXI.
46. ​​The first Pazyryk mound. L., 1950.
47. Rec. on the book: Rudenko S.I. and N.M. The art of the Scythians of Altai.- Vestn. Lepingr. University, 1950, No. 1.
48. From the distant past of the Altai region. Barnaul, 1950.
49. Archaeological study of the territory of one ancient village on the river. Ob.- KSIIMK, 1951, issue. XL.
50. Results of three years of work on the Upper Ob. - Theses of reports at the session of the department of history and philosophy and the plenum of the Institute of the History of Material Culture, dedicated to the results of archaeological research. 1946-1950 M., 1951.
51. Monuments of the Karasuk stage in Central Kazakhstan. - SA, 1952, vol. XVI.
52. Some results of three years of archaeological work on the Upper Ob - KSIIMK, 1952, vol. XLVIII.
53. Bronze Age dugouts near the Lyapichev farm on the Don. - KSIIMK, 1953, issue. L.
54. Neolithic burial in the village. Bateni on the Yenisei. - MIA, 1953, No. 39.
55. Chariot of the early nomads of Altai. - SGE, 1955, issue. VII.
56. Some questions of the history of the formation and development of early nomadic societies of Kazakhstan and Southern Siberia. - KSIE, 1955, XXIV.
57. Exhibition of monuments of culture and art of the early nomads of Altai - SGE, 1955, XIII.
281

58. Pazyryk. - TSB, 1955, vol. 31.
59. Northern Kazakhstan in the era of early nomads. - KSIIMK, 1956, issue. 61.
60. History of the ancient tribes of the Upper Ob according to excavations near the village. Big River. - MIA, 1956, No. 48.
61. On the question of the cultures of the Late Bronze Age in Siberia. - KSIIMK, 1956, issue. 64.
62. Felt depicting the struggle of mythical monsters from the Fifth Pazyryk mound in Altai. - SGE, 1956, issue. IX.
63. Culture and art of the population of St. Petersburg and Kazakhstan in the Bronze Age. - Guide to the exhibition. Primitive culture. Second issue. State Hermitage Museum. L.,
1956.
64. Tribes of St. Petersburg and Kazakhstan (during the Bronze Age); Tribes of Siberia... in the 1st millennium BC - In the book: Essays on the history of the USSR. The primitive communal system and the most ancient states. M., 1956.
65. Stages of development of the economy of the pastoral tribes of Kazakhstan and Southern Siberia in the Bronze Age, - KSIE, 1957, issue. XXVI.
66. Ancient art of Altai. L., 1958 (with parallel French text).
67. Connections of the nomads of Southern Siberia with Central Asia and the Middle East in the 1st millennium BC. e.- Materials of the Second Meeting of Archaeologists and Ethnographers of Central Asia. M.-L., 1959.
68. Bronze Age writer from the village of Znamenki. - KSIIMK, 1956, issue. 80.
69. Regarding one review. - SA, 1960, No. 4.
70. From the editor (to the book by S. S. Chernikov “East Kazakhstan in the Bronze Age”). - MIA, 1960, No. 88.
71. Archaeological research on the Ob in the bed of the reservoir of the Novosibirsk hydroelectric power station. - Learn, conference on the history of Siberia and the Far East. Abstracts of reports and messages. Irkutsk, 1960.
72. The so-called touchstones of the Scythian-Sarmatian time. - In the book: Research in archeology. Collection of articles in honor of prof. M. I. Artamonova. L., 1961.
73. Kurgan as an architectural monument. - Abstracts of reports at meetings dedicated to the results of field research in 1960. M., 1961.
74. The most ancient monuments of the heroic epic in Southern Siberia. - ASGE, 1961, issue. 3.
75. Memo on excavation of ground burial grounds. L., 1961.
76. From the editor (to the book by V. S. Sorokin “The Bronze Age Burial Ground of Tasty-Bu-tak I...”). - MIA, 1962, No. 120.
77. Anthropomorphic figurine of the Bronze Age from the Ob River. - SGE, 1962, issue. XXII.
78. Bronze Age; Sakp p Usuni.- In the book: History of Kyrgyzstan. Frunze, 1963, vol. 1.
79. About the so-called female figurines of the Trypillian culture, - ASGE, 1964, vol. 6.
80. Archaeological excavations on the Yenisei. - Abstracts of reports at meetings dedicated to the results of field research in 1963. M., 1964.
81. Applied and decorative arts on the Yenisei in Scythian times. - Abstracts of reports at the anniversary scientific session. L.: State. Hermitage, 1964.
82. Pile carpet from the Fifth Pazyryk mound; Gold plaque from Siberia. - In the book: Hermitage. L., 1964.
83. Works of the Krasnoyarsk expedition. - KSIA, 1965, issue. 100.
84. About the Kelteminar house. - In the book: New in Soviet archeology. M., 1965.
85. About black-polished ceramics of the Caucasus, Kazakhstan and Siberia in the Late Bronze Age. - KSIA, 1966, issue. 108.
86. Mounds of the IV-III centuries. BC e. on the lake Saragash.-KSIA, 1966, issue. 107 (together with M. N. Pshenntsyna).
87. Works of the Krasnoyarsk expedition.- Abstracts. reports at meetings devoted to the results of field research in 1965. M., 1966.
88. Eastern Aral Sea region. - In the book: Central Asia in the Age of Stone and Bronze. M.-L., 1966.
89. Inscription or deer? (About one publication). - Peoples of Asia and Africa, 1966, No. 2 (together with S. G. Klyashtorny).
90. Excavations of burial grounds in Western Siberia. - JSC - 1965. M., 1966 (together with M.N. Komarova).
91. Early nomads of Altai. Scythia and Altai.- In the book: Guide to the halls of the Er-mitage. L.-M., 1966.
92. Karasuksky burial ground Kyurgenner. - JSC - 1966. M., 1967 (together with M.N. Komarova).
93. Afanasyevskaya culture (together with E. B. Vadetskaya); Karasuk culture (together with G. A. Maksimenkov and B. N. Pyatkin); Tagar culture.- In the book: History of Siberia. L., 1968, vol. 1.
94. Steppe pastoral tribes of Central Asia in the developed and late Bronze Age. - Problems of archeology of Central Asia. Abstracts of reports and communications for the meeting on the archeology of Central Asia. L., 1968.
95. Works of the Karasuk detachment. - JSC - 1967. M., 1968.
96. Bronze Age; Saki; Usun, - In the book: History of the Kirghiz SSR. Frunze, 1968. v. 1.
97. Excavations near Mount Tepsey on the Yenisei, - JSC - 1968. M., 1969 (together with M.N. Komarova).
98. Pile carpet from the Fifth Pazyryk mound; Gold plaque from Siberia. - In the book: Treasures of the Hermitage. 2nd ed. L., 1969.
99. The Bronze Age in the USSR - Theses of reports at the session of the History Department of the USSR Academy of Sciences... April 18-25, 1969 JL, 1969.
100. Sibirie du Sud. Archaeologia Mundi. Geneva, 1969 (in French, German and English).
101. Classification, type, culture, - In the book: Theoretical foundations of Soviet archeology (Abstracts of reports). L., 1969.
102. Archaeological collections of the Krasnoyarsk expedition.^ SGE, 1970, issue. XXXI.
103. Burial grounds near the city of Tepsei. - JSC - 1969. M., 1970.
104. Shepherd tribes of Central Asia in the era of developed and late bronze. - KSIA, 1970, issue. 122.
105. Miniatures of Tashtyk culture. - ASGE, 1971. issue. 13.
106. Complex of Tashtyk funeral monuments near the city of Tepsei. - JSC - 1970. M., 1971.
107. Methods for studying megalithic funerary monuments based on the results of the work of the Krasnoyarsk expedition. - Abstracts of reports. Tbilisi, 1971.
108. Excavations of the royal burial mound of the Early Scythian period in Tuva. - Brief abstracts of reports to the plenum dedicated to the results of archaeological research in 1971. LOIA AS USSR. L., 1972 (together with M. Kh. Mannai-ool).
The same. - Abstracts of reports at sections devoted to the results of field research in 1971. M., 1972.
109. Bull in the rituals and cult of ancient cattle breeders. - Theses of reports at the session and plenums dedicated to the results of field research in 1971. M., 1972.
110. Arzhan - a royal mound of early Scythian times in Tuva. - JSC - 1971. M., 1972 (together with M.N. Mannai-ool).
111. Survey of the shores of the Krasnoyarsk Sea. - AO-1971. M., 1972 (together with G. A. Maksimenkov).
112. Excavations of the Arzhan Tuve mound. - JSC - 1972. M., 1973 (together with M. X. Mannai-ool).
113. Soil and archaeological sites in their interaction. - Abstracts of session reports. Tashkent, 1973.
114. Archaeological map of the coast of the Novosibirsk reservoir. - In the book: Questions of the archeology of Siberia. Scientific works of the Novosibirsk State Pedagogical Institute. Novosibirsk, 1973, issue. 85 (together with T. N. Troitskaya, A. P. Umansky and E. A. Savostyanova).
115. Arzhan Kurgan - the grave of the “king” of early Scythian times - UZ TNIYALI, 1973, XVI (together with M. Kh. Mannai-ool).
116. The third year of excavations of the Arzhan mound. - JSC - 1973. M., 1974 (together with M. Kh. Mannai-ool).
117. Arzhan mound according to excavations in 1973-1974 - UZ TNIYALI, 1975, XVII (together with M. Kh. Mannai-ool).
118. On the chronology of the most ancient monuments of the era of early nomads. - USA, 1975, issue. 3.
119. Some questions of the chronology of early nomads in connection with materials from the Arzhan Kurgan. - In the book: Early nomads of Central Asia and Kazakhstan. L., 1975.
120. Completion of excavations of the Arzhan mound - JSC - 1974. M., 1975 (together with
M. X. Mannai-oolom).
121. Arzhan Kurgan in Tuva and questions of the formation of cultures of the Scythian-Siberian type. - In the book: The latest discoveries of Soviet archaeologists. Kyiv, 1975, part II.
122. Diary of the excavations of Toyanov Gorodok, carried out in 1924 - From the history of Siberia. Tomsk, 1976, issue. \3.
123. Excavations near the city of Tepsei on the Yenisei. - JSC - 1975. M., 1976.
124. Monumental sculpture of the Scythian time in the steppes of Eurasia and in the Urals. - In the book: Ethnocultural connections of the population of the Urals and Volga region with Siberia, Central Asia and Kazakhstan in the Iron Age. Ufa, 1976.
125. Arzhan. Culture of the Scythian-Siberian type. - UNESCO Courier, 1977, January.
126. Excavations near the city of Tepsei. - JSC - 1976. M., 1977. (together with Yu. S. Khudyakov and N. A. Bokovenko).
127. Bull in the rituals and cults of ancient cattle breeders. - In the book: Problem of archeology of Eurasia and North America. M., 1977.
128. Sayan-Altai deer (Sketch on the theme of the Scythian-Siberian animal style). - In the book: Problems of archeology. JL, 1978, vol. 2.
129. On the question of the formation of cultures of the Scythian-Siberian type in connection with the discovery of the Arzhan Kurgan. - KSIA, 1978, no. 154.
130. Complex of archaeological monuments near Mount Tepsei on the Yenisei. Novosibirsk: Nauka, 1979 (together with M. P. Zavitukhpna, M. N. Komarova and others).
131. The main problems of the archeology of Siberia. - In the book: Soviet archeology in the 10th Five-Year Plan. All-Union Conference (thesis). JL, 1979.
132. Arzhan. Royal mound of early Scythian times. JL: Science, 1980.
133. Monumental art at the dawn of Scythian-Siberian cultures in steppe Asia. - Brief abstracts of reports of the scientific conference of the OIPK GE. L., 1981.
134. About cenotaphs. - In the book: Problems of archeology and ethnography of Siberia. Irkutsk, 1982.
135. Archaeological traceology. - Special course program. Sverdlovsk, 1982.
136. The initial phase of the development of Scythian-Siberian cultures. - In the book: Archeology of Southern Siberia. Kemerovo, 1983.

Methodological and methodological principles of scientific activity of M.P. Gryaznov were formed, on the one hand, on the basis of the heritage of Russian archaeological, paleoanthropological, ethnographic thought of the 19th – early 20th centuries, and on the other hand, under the influence of the Marxist materialist understanding of history (Matyushchenko V.I., Shvydkaya N.P., 1990, p. 77–89).

It should be noted that in the 1920–1930s. The staged approach to the study of ancient societies, one of the developers of which was Academician N.Ya., became widespread in Russian science. Marr (Tsyb S.V., 1988; Babushkin A.P., Kolmakov V.B., Pisarevsky N.P., 1994). Initially, the theory of stages was developed by a researcher within the framework of linguistics. Giving language the role of a superstructure of society, it was believed that the change in “types” of production, causing changes in the social system, is reflected in collective thinking and, accordingly, in the linguistic structure. This, in turn, allowed us to conclude that each socio-economic formation corresponds to a specific linguistic system. A little later, N.Ya. Marr tried to correlate the “linguistic stages” with data on the history of material culture. However, this attempt was unsuccessful, since, according to some scientists, it “was determined by a lack of understanding of the dialectical relationship between the base and the superstructure, as well as an overestimation of the ideological role of language in the development of society” (Babushkin A.P., Kolmakov V.B., Pisarevsky N.P. ., 1994, pp. 34–35). Gradually N.Ya. Marr and his associates, in particular I.I. Meshchaninov (1932), V.V. Holmsten (1933) and some others extended the provisions of the theory of stages to the study of history. They proceeded from the idea that the process of cultural development was unified for all regions of the Old World at the initial stages of the formation of humanity. The existing differences in the forms of cultural development were derived by researchers from the unequal conditions and the dissimilar nature of their manifestation, which determine a certain variability in the general course of development. It was proposed to study the process of modification of forms in their transitions from stage to stage within the framework of a special paleontological or genetic approach. The main content of this approach was to explain the essence of this process, taking into account all its driving forces (Babushkin A.P., Kolmakov V.B., Pisarevsky N.P., 1994, p. 36). The possibilities of considering the history of ancient societies within the paleontological (genetic) approach were demonstrated to a certain extent by I.I. Meshchaninov (1932) and V.V. Holmsten (1933) when characterizing the nomadic societies of Eurasia of the Scythian era, including the “Pazyryk people” of the Altai Mountains. The influence of the stage theory N.Ya. Marr and his associates can be seen quite clearly in the concept of “early nomads” by M.P. Gryaznov (1939), within which the archaeologist identified three stages (stages). In addition, M.P. Gryaznov fully accepted the reconstruction of the religious, mythological and economic role of the horse among the nomads of the Altai Mountains, proposed by N.Ya. Marr and I.I. Meshchaninov (1932, pp. 10–11) (Gryaznov M.P., 1950, pp. 84–85).

No less important for the scientific activity of M.P. Gryaznov had the evolutionary-ethnological developments of his teacher S.A. Teploukhova (Kitova L.Yu., 1994; Bobrov V.V., 1994). In his cultural and historical interpretations M.P. Gryaznov proceeded from the conclusion of S.A. Teploukhov that one archaeological culture is replaced by another – more developed one. At the same time, the researcher did not absolutize evolutionary development, but paid serious attention to the role of ethnocultural contacts and migrations in this process (Kitova L.Yu., 1994, p. 66).

This theoretical basis formed the basis for the study of one of the central themes in the work of M.P. Gryaznov, dedicated to the culture of the nomads of the Altai Mountains of the Scythian era. The most notable contribution to this was made in the late 1920s - 1950s, that is, during the period of greatest interest in Altai. In 1928–1929 M.P. Gryaznov published several articles that examined the uniqueness of the Altai mounds, in which permafrost was discovered that preserved organic materials. In 1930, he pointed out the possibility of establishing the relative age of ancient mounds from the wood preserved in them, based on the well-known fact that the size and type of tree rings depend on the climatic characteristics of a particular year (Gryaznov M.P., 1930a) . Probably, this approach to the study of archaeological material was developed under the influence of S.A. Teploukhov, who attached great importance to the influence of the environmental situation on cultural and historical processes (Shevchenko O.V., 1992, p. 79; Bobrov V.V., 1994, p. 74; Kiryushin Yu.F., Tishkin A.A. , 1997, p. 12). The influence of the scientific heritage of S.A. Teploukhov can be traced in other publications of M.P. Gryaznova. Thus, in his work “Ancient Cultures of Altai” (Gryaznov M.P., 1930b), he, relying on previously known materials, using the periodizations proposed by V.V. Radlov (Marsadolov L.S., 1996a, p. 20) and S.A. Teploukhov (1929) for Southern Siberia, drew on the results of new archaeological data and developed a schematic structure of the change of cultures in Altai, dividing the monuments of this region into seven main stages. In this article, the scientist provided the first summary of the specific things discovered that served as the basis for the formation of ideas about the development of ancient society at the turn of the eras (Bronze and Iron). In the proposed M.P. The mud division schematically defines the sequence of changing cultures without specific chronological references. Single and random finds were not enough for a more perfect periodization. What was needed was mass material reflecting various aspects of people’s lives. However, the first experience of periodization of archaeological monuments of Altai, proposed by the researcher in 1930, is considered one of the important results of his work (Avanesova N.I., Kyzlasov L.R., 1985) and has not lost its significance to the present day (Kiryushin Yu.F., Tishkin A.A., 1997, pp. 12–13).

In April 1930, in the sector of the archaic formation of GAIMK, a small research group was formed, called IKS after the first letters of the words meaning the problem of study: the history of nomadic cattle breeding (Artamonov M.I., 1977, p. 4; Zhuk A.V., 1997, pp. 53–54). This scientific team included V.V. Golmsten (group leader), M.I. Artamonov, G.P. Sosnovsky and M.P. Gryaznov. Despite the fact that this group existed only until the autumn of 1931 (Zhuk A.V., 1997, p. 57), nevertheless, it received important conclusions and laid down further directions for the development of nomadic studies as a whole. The most significant results of the scientists’ work were the recognition of the historical fact that before the dominance of nomadic pastoralism in the steppes of Eurasia, a complex agricultural and pastoral sedentary economy flourished there. In addition, it was established that nomadic farming arose only at the end of the Bronze Age and was finally established during the period of the spread of iron in the Scythian-Sarmatian cultures (Artamonov M.I., 1977, p. 4).

The concept created with the participation of M.P. Gryaznov, was reflected in the subsequent works of the researcher. In 1939, he wrote the paragraph “Early nomads of Western Siberia and Kazakhstan” for the collective work “History of the USSR from ancient times to the formation of the Old Russian state” (Gryaznov M.P., 1939). In this work, based on archaeological data from Altai and adjacent territories, Mikhail Petrovich introduced into the scientific terminology the concept of a formational character “the era of early nomads,” which covered eight centuries (VII century BC – 1st century AD .) and was divided into three stages: 1) Mayemir (VII–V centuries BC; 2) Pazyryk (V–III centuries BC); 3) Shibinsky (II century BC – 1st century AD). Archaeological materials characterizing each of the stages, according to the researcher, made it possible to “trace successive changes in the economic and social life of the tribes” throughout the era of the early nomads (Gryaznov M.P., 1939, p. 400). In fact, M.P. Gryaznov did not make a fundamental terminological difference between the concepts of “the era of the early nomads” and “the culture of the early nomads.” It follows from this that in the Altai Mountains throughout the Scythian era, in the scientist’s view, there was one culture that went through the three above-mentioned stages in its development. In this regard, the researcher noted that “the monuments of the Mayemir stage represent the same culture (the culture of the early nomads of Altai. - Author) that is familiar from the monuments of the Pazyryk and Shibin stages” (Gryaznov M.P., 1947, pp. 9–11) .

In the work of 1939 M.P. Gryaznov gave a general description of each of the identified stages. Thus, the main features of the Mayemiri stage were the burial of a horse in a separate special pit, next to the main grave of the buried person. The monuments of this stage included mounds in the Mayemir steppe, objects excavated under Solonechny Belk on Kuyum. The second, Pazyryk stage, was characterized by such innovations in culture as the development of the technology of forging iron tools and weapons, the accompanying burial of a horse in the same grave with the deceased, and the production of weapons from bronze of reduced sizes specifically for burial. The scientist attributed the mounds in Pazyryk, Tuekta and others to the Pazyryk stage. Finally, the largest number of monuments belonged to the third, Shiba stage: Berel, Tuekta, Kurai, Katanda, Shibe. M.P. Gryaznov noted that “the funeral ritual in the mounds and the composition of objects placed in the grave” remained the same as at the Pazyryk stage. However, bronze tools and weapons completely disappeared, replaced by iron objects. The exception was bronze arrowheads of the Late Scythian type. It was emphasized that iron weapons retained the shape of bronze ones, and horn decorations became numerous and varied (Gryaznov M.P., 1939, pp. 407–408). According to L.S. Marsadolova, this work by M.P. Gryaznova demonstrated the final methodological transition of the scientist to the position of historical materialism. Now changes in economic development began to be considered in close connection with changes in the social system, ideological ideas, art, etc. (Marsadolov L.S., 1996a, p. 26).

Developing his ideas, M.P. On July 5, 1945, Gryaznov made a report at a meeting of the bronze and early iron sector of the IIMK “Monuments of the Mayemiri stage of the era of early nomads in Altai,” later published in expanded form (Gryaznov M.P., 1947). He proposed to distinguish the monuments of the Mayemiri stage (VII–V centuries BC) on the basis of three main features: 1) the design of the bridle (with stirrup-shaped bits and three-hole cheekpieces); 2) the shape of bronze mirrors with a vertical side wall along the edge and a loop in the form of a flat half ring in the middle; 3) complete absence of iron tools (all bronze tools have shapes close to Karasuk ones). To the monuments of this stage, the scientist this time included mounds and a treasure in the Mayemir steppe, burials near Solonechny Belk, burials in Ust-Kuyum, a complex of bronze objects from riding horse equipment discovered near Zmeinogorsk, two more such sets from the Semipalatinsk Museum, as well as random finds . Among the features characterizing this period, the researcher indicated the following: the presence of a horse in a separate grave, the archaic nature of the “animal style”, the absence of pottery, economic and social differentiation of society, the pastoral form of farming (Gryaznov M.P., 1947, pp. 9–14 ). Almost ten years later M.P. Gryaznov, based on the results of his excavations at Near Elbany, narrowed the date of the Mayemirian stage to the 7th–6th centuries. BC. In addition, he pointed out the differences and similarities between the Mayemiri monuments of the Altai Mountains and the Bolsherechensky ones of the Upper Ob, which he previously attributed to the same “culture of early nomads” of Altai (Gryaznov M.P., 1956, pp. 44–98).

After the excavations of the Arzhan mound in Tuva, archaeologists faced quite a lot of problems, some of which naturally fell on the shoulders of M.P. Gryaznova (Kiryushin Yu.F., Tishkin A.A., 1997, pp. 19–20). In 1978, the scientist sets out his concept of the formation of cultures of the Scythian-Siberian type, developing ideas that were formulated thesis in a number of previous works (Gryaznov M.P., 1975a–c). At the same time, he noted that “... the initial stage of Scythian culture (VIII-VII centuries BC) ... is known not only in the Black Sea region and Tuva,” but also in Altai. The monuments of this stage, which also preceded the Mayemir stage, include “a few burials... in the burial grounds of Kurtu and Ust-Kuyum.” Concluding the consideration of the question posed, M.P. Gryaznov (1978, pp. 17–18) makes the most important conclusion for all Scythology that “in the vast expanses of Eurasia from the 8th century. BC. cultures of the Scythian-Siberian type, which are similar in general terms, arise synchronously and develop, which had features of originality and originality due to the special conditions of existence. This approach implements the idea of ​​polycentrism in explaining the process of formation of the Scythian-Siberian community over the vast expanses of Eurasia. Subsequently, M.P. Gryaznov identified three phases in the development of cultures in the 8th–3rd centuries. BC: 1) Arzhan-Chernogorovskaya (VIII–VII centuries BC); 2) Mayemiri-Kelermes (VII–VI centuries BC); 3) Pazyryk-Chertomlyk (V–III centuries BC). Each phase, archaeologically, was characterized by the features of the Scythian triad: weapons, animal style, horse equipment (Gryaznov M.P., 1979, pp. 4–7). In 1983, in one of his last published works, M.P. Gryaznov again turned to the problem of identifying the initial stage of the Scythian-Siberian cultures, dating back to the 9th–7th centuries. BC. Characterizing the monuments of the Arzhan-Chernogorov phase in Altai as one of the cultural and historical regions he identified, M.P. Gryaznov pointed out that this region undoubtedly went through such a stage of development and had its own unique culture. However, archaeological materials, in his opinion, were still in insufficient quantities to substantiate such a stage in relation to Altai (Gryaznov M.P., 1983, p. 9). Concluding a brief overview of the cultural-chronological concept of M.P. Gryaznov, it can be noted that the phases he identified in their content corresponded to the stage-by-stage approach developed by scientists back in the 1st half of the 20th century. Therefore, the archaeologist’s attempts to fill the “old” theoretical principles of research with new archaeological material led to certain methodological and cultural-historical contradictions. The ideas expressed were not picked up and were practically not reflected in the works of followers. However, despite this, the contribution of M.P. Gryaznov’s contribution to science is undoubtedly significant, and the features of the approach to the interpretation of sources are fully consistent with the traditions of the Soviet era and the level of accumulation of materials on the identified problems. It is possible that a return to the researcher’s concept will take place and it will be filled with new content.

It should be noted that in addition to studying the cultural and chronological aspects of the Scythian era of the Altai Mountains, M.P. Gryaznov paid some attention to other issues of the development of nomadic culture. Back in 1939 M.P. Gryaznov noted that the “era of early nomads” of Altai was characterized by the “decomposition” of the primitive communal system, the emergence of social differentiation and slavery in the late Scythian period. Taking into account the peculiarities of the funeral rite of the nomads of the Altai Mountains of the Scythian time, he identified three groups of mounds corresponding to the social status of the buried: 1) poor; 2) richer (average); 3) huge kurums (Gryaznov M.P., 1939, pp. 407–411). A little later, the scientist noted that in this era, the nomads observed not only developed social differentiation, but also a complex political structure of society. This was expressed, in particular, in the dominance of nomadic pastoralists over sedentary pastoral and agricultural groups of the population (Gryaznov M.P., 1947, pp. 14–15).

Valuable material for paleosocial reconstructions of M.P. Gryaznov received it after excavating the First Pazyryk Mound. Taking into account the monumental nature of the structure, as well as the insignificant percentage of large mounds in relation to small ones, the researcher determined the status of the person buried in this mound as a “tribal leader.” The development of social relations in Pazyryk society, according to the scientist, was evidenced by the fact he established that wealth and highest public positions in the clan and tribe were inherited (Gryaznov M.P., 1950, pp. 68–69). Having carefully studied the burial materials, primarily the accompanying horse burials, M.P. Gryaznov made the assumption that “these were gifts to the tribal leader from ten clan rulers.” He also believed that the practice of offering existed in everyday life, which was the “norm of economic relations” between the mass of the main producers and officials in the clan and tribe (Gryaznov M.P., 1950, pp. 69–71). Based on these conclusions, M.P. Gryaznov tried to reconstruct the composition of the “Pazyryk” society based on the number of clan rulers who presented gifts to the leaders. As a result, according to his calculations, it turned out that the tribe whose leader was buried in the First Pazyryk mound consisted of 10 clans, in the second - of 7, in the third and fourth - of 14, in the Berel mound - of 16, in the Shibinsky - out of 14. At the same time, the scientist considered the numbers 7 and 14 not random, but evidence of the phratrial division of the “Pazyryk people,” which was a characteristic feature of all peoples who were at the stage of military democracy (Ibid.).

M.P. did not ignore it. Gryaznov and the study of the worldview and art of the Altai nomads. He analyzed in sufficient detail Pazyryk images and subjects, which were decorative and ornamental in nature. At the same time, the researcher pointed out that the art of the nomads of the region under consideration “was enriched... with artistic images... and stylistic techniques borrowed from more distant foreign cultural peoples, from the peoples of ancient China and Iran” (Gryaznov M.P., Bulgakov A.P., 1958 , pp. 10–11). However, if the borrowing of motifs and techniques from Chinese art of the Zhan-guo and Han periods did not become widespread in the art of the ancient tribes of Altai, the influence of Iran and Central Asia on the development of artistic traditions was much more significant. Moreover, the influence of the art of the states of Western and Central Asia was reflected both in the nature of ornamental motifs, stylistic devices, and in the mythological content of artistic images (Gryaznov M.P., 1950, pp. 72–85; Gryaznov M.P., Bulgakov A.P. ., 1958, pp. 7–14).

Considering the mythology of nomads, M.P. Gryaznov made an assumption about the existence of their ideas about the three-level structure of the world (heaven, earth, underworld), which are to some extent similar to the views of the Altaians. All three parts of the Universe were correlated in ancient times with specific mythical creatures: the winged tiger and the eagle - with the sky, the fish-like monster, the snake - with the underworld, and the rest of the characters inhabited the earth. Each of the mythical creatures had a degree of power and strength (Gryaznov M.P., 1950, p. 82). The existence of ideas about the three-level structure of the universe among the cattle breeders of the Altai Mountains was to a certain extent substantiated by subsequent researchers (Kubarev V.D., 1991; Polosmak N.V., 1997, 2001a; Dashkovsky P.K., 1997, 2002; etc.) .

Characterizing the worldview of nomads, M.P. Gryaznov noted that ideas about zoomorphic mythical creatures ruling the world existed in the previous Karasuk era. From the Mayemirian stage, images of these animals began to be placed not only on weapons, but also on items of personal clothing and horse equipment. According to the scientist, the content of art was significantly influenced by the peculiarities of existence and life of the nomadic society itself. Since in the era of military democracy the bravest and strongest warrior, military leader, powerful family, clan, tribe comes to the forefront in the struggle, a similar situation was reflected in mythology. These mythical creatures, as indicated by M.P. Gryaznov, “were the embodiment of strength, power and inaccessibility...”, and their “relationships were determined by the struggle, the invariable outcome of which was the brutal reprisal of the strong with his victim” (Gryaznov M.P., 1950, p. 82). Without touching on the substantive side of this hypothesis, M.P. Gryaznov, one should only pay attention to the possible methodological validity of such arguments of the archaeologist. The point is that in 1930 the work of the famous Russian philosopher A.F. was published. Losev "Dialectics of Myth". True, the book was soon banned, and the philosopher himself was arrested and exiled to camps, but, nevertheless, it managed to hit store shelves and attract the attention of scientific circles (Takho-Godi A.A., 1991). One of the conclusions reached by A.F. Losev, was that mythology reflects social life (ancient mythology reflects the life of the clan, etc.) (Losev A.F., 1994). It is possible that M.P. Gryaznov was familiar with these developments by A.F. Loseva. In any case, in his work on the interpretation of the mythological plots of the Altai nomads (interpretation of the interaction of mythical characters by analogy with the life of a nomadic society), one can discern similarities with the features of the approach to mythology developed by A.F. Loseva.

It is important to note once again that M.P. Gryaznov, like most researchers of that time, was influenced by the stage theory of the development of societies developed by N.Ya. Marrom. With regard to the reconstruction of the religious-mythological system of the “Pazyryk people”, this was expressed in the fact that M.P. Gryaznov, following N.Ya. Marr (1926, 1929), L.A. Potapov (1935) tried, on the basis of materials from the First Pazyryk Kurgan, to identify the remnants of totemism among the cattle breeders of the Altai Mountains. According to these scientists, the deer masks that adorned the horses from this mound indicated that in ancient times the leading role in the economy and in religion belonged not to the horse, but to the deer (Gryaznov M.P., 1950, pp. 84–85).

Concluding the consideration of the creative heritage of M.P. Gryaznov in the field of Scythology, it should be noted that some of the scientist’s ideas were further developed in the scientific activities of his students, many of whom began to study the Scythian era of Eurasia. Among the associates, students and pupils of M.P. Gryaznov can be noted A.D. Gracha, Ya.A. Shera, M.N. Pshenitsyn, K.A. Akisheva, A.M. Orazbaeva, M.K. Kadyrbaeva, M.Kh. Mannai-Oola, L.S. Marsadolova, N.A. Bokovenko and many others.

It is generally accepted that the beginning of Scythian culture is determined by the 7th century. BC, and the period of the 7th-6th centuries, well distinguished from archaeological monuments. BC. considered and called the Early Scythian time.

Meanwhile, back in 1953 A.A. Jessen convincingly showed that the so-called. “Early Scythian time” is preceded by a period, quite unique monuments of which characterize a special stage of the culture of the Early Iron Age in our European south, dating back to the 8th-7th centuries. BC. and represent “the initial stage in the development of Scythian culture in the broad sense of the term.” The main provisions of the work of A.A. Jessen was accepted in our science and received further development, but his final thesis about the initial stage of Scythian culture did not receive recognition - the period of the 8th-7th centuries. BC. usually called Cimmerian or Pre-Scythian and is not included in the concept of Scythian culture.

Regardless of which specific tribes left certain groups of monuments of the 8th-7th centuries. BC. in the Northern Black Sea region, it must be admitted, following Jessen, that in the steppes of our South a Scythian culture had already formed, or, better to say, a culture of Scythian-Siberian types. After all, the arrows in these monuments are already quite Scythian types. Swords and daggers are closer to the Scythian 7th-6th centuries. BC, but not to the Late Bronze Age. Also bronze bits, cheekpieces and much more - everything belongs to the initial forms of Scythian types of things. And although all these things are clearly distinguishable from the “early Scythian things” of the 7th-6th centuries. BC, but differ from them to the same extent as these latter are distinguishable from the things of the heyday of Scythian culture of the V-III centuries. BC.

Archaeologists of Siberia, Kazakhstan and Central Asia, relying on Eastern European parallels, dated all their monuments of early nomads of the archaic type to no earlier than the 7th century. BC. This is how ideas about the Aral Sakas of the 7th-5th centuries were created. BC, about the Tasmolin culture in Kazakhstan and the Mayemir stage in Altai in the 7th-6th centuries. BC, although some authors in some cases suggested earlier dates - IX-VII centuries. BC.

Ideas about the 7th century BC. as the date of the beginning of the Scythian culture are very strong in our minds, but we need to get rid of them and reconsider all the archaeological material corresponding to this. Then we will be convinced that the monuments of the Scythian-Siberian appearance, which can be identified as the 9th-7th centuries. BC, are already known in many areas of the Great Steppe Belt. First of all, this is the royal mound of Arzhan. The early stage of the Scythian-type culture in Tuva that he characterizes is a common phenomenon for the wide expanses of the steppe zone. Let's call this period (IX-VII centuries BC) the Arzhan-Chernogorov phase of the development of Scythian-Siberian cultures.

Widespread in Tuva (as well as in the steppes of the Black Sea region and other areas) three-grooved plaques (Fig. 1-6 ) and plaques from boar tusks (Fig., 7-26 ), the first were made of white mudstone, greenish semi-precious antigorite and gilded wood, the second were of different shapes - round, binary, comma-shaped and butterfly-shaped;

The established Scythian-Siberian animal style, represented by images of animals “on tiptoe”, sculptural figurines of argali on the tops, a predator curled in a circle, i.e. "Panther" (Fig.);

Deer stones of the Mongolian type, in full form representing the figure of a warrior with a conventionally schematically shown cap, earrings, three oblique lines instead of a face, a necklace, a belt with a dagger, a bow and an ax hanging on it, often covered with many silhouette images of animals, mainly deer, distributed in different variants as far west as Bulgaria and Romania;

Petroglyphs (images of deer and other animals in the same unique style as on deer stones - “on tiptoe,” at a gallop, with an unnaturally elongated muzzle, similar to a long bird’s beak, in various combinations and compositions).

All this, except for the animal style, is also typical for the steppes of the far west, for the so-called “Cimmerian” or “Pre-Scythian” time in the Northern Black Sea region.

The initial, Arzhan-Chernogorov, phase of the development of Scythian-Siberian cultures has been most fully and deeply studied in the region of the Russian-Ukrainian steppes of the Northern Black Sea region. Much credit for this belongs to A.I. Terenozhkin, who published a number of articles and a special

monograph on the issue of the Cimmerians. In the steppes of our south, burial grounds of the 8th-7th centuries. BC. unknown. The graves were usually built one at a time on separate hills or mounds (ancient mounds), less often two on one hill (5 cases) and even less often three on a hill (3 cases) or on two adjacent hills (2 cases). In only one case, a burial ground consisting of seven (or maybe only three?) small mounds of the “Pre-Scythian” time was discovered and explored (the village of Suvorovo, Odessa region). Men were often buried with weapons, as well as a bridle and saddle, sometimes placed separately outside the grave. The material from the burials is typologically heterogeneous.

Daggers and swords of three types: 1 - iron with a bronze (cross-shaped) handle, the pommel of which is mushroom-shaped, the guard is straight with long wings; 2 - iron and bimetallic with a characteristic guard with sharp corners of the wings lowered down (Kabardino-Balkarian type); 3 - bronze with a mushroom-shaped pommel and a flat guard, the lowered wings of which have acquired the shape of parallelograms. The first two types are of North Caucasian origin, the third is close to Asian forms.

Bronze arrowheads are close to the set of arrows in Arzhan, like the Arzhan ones, they belong to Early Scythian forms.

Stone drilled hatchet, hammer hatchet, cylindrical hammers and bronze boar axes [ Kobansky] type - all are similar to the North Caucasians.

A characteristic bridle with bits with stirrup-shaped rings and cheekpieces of the Chernogorov, Kamyshevakh and Tsimbala types. The first two types are similar to the corresponding forms of the Sayan-Altai cheek-pieces, the third was common in the Ciscaucasia. Along with this, North Caucasian types of bridles are common, the ringed bits of which are equipped with a hole for fastening with cheekpieces - the so-called “two-ringed bits” with a small ring-hole at the base of a slightly larger ring (Fig. 6, 8 ), and the cheekpieces are three-looped with a characteristic curved blade. Other North Caucasian types of bridles are also found. The saddles are represented by girth buckles, also of the North Caucasian type - a pair of large rings with a loop-plate for attaching to a belt (Fig. 7 ) and with a more complex device for attaching and fastening the belt (Fig., 21 ).

Likewise, in Tuva, all kinds of three-grooved plaques are common, white argillite, from a horse’s tooth, bronze in complex compositions of shoulder plaques, in bits and as the pommel of a dagger (Fig. 1-6 ), and also characteristic plaques from boar tusks, which in publications are usually incorrectly called bone plaques (Fig. 9-20 ).

Club-shaped figures are widespread in different versions, the basis of which is a circle framed on four sides by mushroom-shaped caps in profile (Fig. 21-24, 30, 32 ). They are usually called the “diamond-shaped sign”, taking the background between the circle and the caps, shaped like an ace of diamonds, for a rhombus, or “sun symbol”. Also common are peculiar lunar plaques in the form of three to seven circles arranged in an arc, sometimes paired (Fig. 25-31 ), and, finally, spiral patterns (Fig. 33 ).

In the last decade, a small series of anthropomorphic steles has become known in the Crimea, Kharkov region, Bulgaria and Romania, strikingly close to the deer stones of Mongolia and Sayan-Altai. On them, using similar techniques, a cap, a necklace, earrings, a belt with weapons and other details of the schematic image of a warrior are carved. There are only no deer.

The Northern Black Sea region appears to us at the time of the initial phase of development of the culture of the Scythian-Siberian tribes as a unique ethnocultural formation, formed, however, in interaction with the cultures of other regions of the steppes, including very remote ones. The closest cultural connection should be assumed with the tribes of the North Caucasus and Ciscaucasia. Over time, as material accumulates, the region under consideration can probably be divided into several separate cultural and historical regions, which, however, is already being outlined by some researchers.

Another large ethno-cultural region is the North Caucasus and Ciscaucasia. Several local cultures are clearly distinguished here. In our analysis, however, it is more convenient to consider it as a single whole. Here, burial grounds were studied, sometimes consisting of dozens of graves, most of which have not yet been published or have been published only selectively. The region is characterized by daggers of the already mentioned two North Caucasian types (Fig., 3, 4, 6- 5 ) and arrowheads of Early Scythian types. Note the daggers with a spiral ornament on a bronze handle from the Furniture Factory 1 burial ground near Kislovodsk (Fig. 7 ) and the village of Abazdekhskaya in the Kuban region. As we will see below, there are analogues to such handle decoration far in the East.

In the male graves of the Kislovodsk group of burial grounds there is usually one of the following objects, apparently of a prestigious nature (signs of their owner belonging to a certain social category?): a stone hatchet (Fig. 9, 10 ); stone cylindrical hammer (Fig. 11, 12 ); the same bronze hammer (Fig. 13, 14 ); bronze hatchet-hammer (Fig. , 15 ); bronze ax of the Koban type (Fig. 16 ); bronze or silver mace (Fig., 17, 18, 20 ) or, finally, a miniature club-shaped object (Fig. 19 ). Here you can clearly see that it was the mace that served as the prototype of mace-shaped ornamental figures (possibly of magical or sacred significance), the so-called “diamond-shaped signs” (compare, for example, Fig. 17 and rice , 21, 22 ). Some of the listed items have already been noted above in the steppes. They are also known in the East - in Kazakhstan and Tuva.

The bridle is usually of the North Caucasian type with a characteristic ringed bit with a hole for the cheekpiece and three-loop cheekpieces. The round ring of the bit usually contains a loop with a plaque for the reins. In addition, bits with a stirrup-shaped ring and cheekpieces of the Chernogorov, Kamyshevakh and Tsimbala types and girth buckles are common, as in the Northern Black Sea region. Three-grooved plaques and plaques made from boar tusks were found as bridle decorations (Fig. 1, 2, 5 ). Quite often there are “lunar” and club-shaped figures.

Now a series of so-called deer stones has become known, although still small, even closer to the Mongolian ones, but, as in the Northern Black Sea region, without deer (Fig.). They constitute a stylistically unique group of steles, different from both the Northern Black Sea and Asian ones.

In general, the North Caucasus and Ciscaucasia at the time in question represented a vast area inhabited by tribes of similar cultures who preserved and developed their local traditions, but largely adopted the basic features of the culture of the early nomads of the Arzhan-Montenegrin phase, common to all steppe tribes. Closer contacts can be traced with the tribes of the steppe Black Sea region.

The third region, attributed to the Aral Sakas, is known to us from two extensive burial mounds (Tagisken and Uygarlyk [ Uygarak]), located in the valley of the river. Syr-Darya. The remains of the buried usually lie on the ancient surface of the earth. Above them there was some kind of wooden-earth structure of a pillar structure. At the feet of the buried men there are bits, a pair of girth buckles and belt plaques. These are obviously the remains of a bridle and saddle placed in the grave. The weapons are different from the previous areas. Bronze and iron daggers with a wide oval guard. Arrowheads are predominantly triangular and trilobed, stalked - forms that originated in Kazakhstan and Central Asia back in the Late Bronze Age. There are also socketed tips with rhombic and lanceolate feathers of the Early Scythian types. Bronze ones have been found - a cylindrical hammer of the North Caucasian type, a mace. There are bronze and iron all-metal knives, including those with a ring-top, a form characteristic of the eastern regions.

Excellent and bridle. A bit with a round and stirrup-shaped ring, usually strict, with rows of tubercles along the shaft. The cheekpieces are rarely bronze or horn. Usually they were apparently made from unstable materials (wood, thick leather) and therefore were not preserved - only bits are often found in graves. Characteristic are peculiar bridle devices with cheekpieces put on the “stirrup” of the bit, for which the middle hole in the cheekpiece was made oblong, and the “stirrup” was equipped with an emphasis at its base. Sometimes the cheekpieces and the bit link were cast as a single unit, monolithic.

The girth buckles are also unique - a pair of rings with a frame on the side for a belt. One ring is smooth, the other has a pin-hoove for fastening a belt. There are numerous bronze belt plaques and piercings. Club-shaped figures are common.

Plaques, buckles and other objects are often decorated in the Scythian-Siberian animal style - deer, mountain goat, predator, bird, etc.: “on tiptoe”, in a gallop, rolled into a ring.

The fourth large region is Central, partly Northern Kazakhstan. Here, at many points, small groups of mounds of the Tasmolin culture, close to the culture of the Sakas of the Aral region, have been studied. In ground burial pits, men were usually buried with a bridle and saddle. Sometimes a horse's head with a bridle on it was placed in the grave (or maybe it was a horse's skin with a skull left in it?).

Bronze daggers with a wide guard, similar in shape to butterfly-shaped ones, are unique. Knives usually have a pommel in the form of a small ring. The arrowheads are similar to those from the Aral Sea.

Characteristic bits have a hole or a hole-loop at the base of the stirrup-shaped ring, which is a special device for rigidly attaching the cheekpiece to the bit using a strap (Fig. 6, 7, 12 ). In one case, at the base of the usual stirrup-shaped ring, part of the strap with which the cheekpiece was tied in the same way as in Arzhan was preserved (Fig. 11 ). As in the Aral Sea region, there is a bit with a cheekpiece rest at the base of the stirrup and a cheekpiece with an oblong oval middle hole (Fig. 5 ). There are also simple three-hole cheekpieces, bronze and horn (Fig., 1, 3 ). Often only the bit is found in the grave - the cheekpieces were apparently wooden or leather. In general, similar versions of the bridle device were common in Central Kazakhstan and the Aral Sea region.

There are various images of animals in bronze, gold and antler items (mountain goat, wild boar, predator). To the monuments of Tasmolinskaya

culture should also be attributed to the drawings of marching deer, carved on the rocks of Arpauzen-V in the foothills of the Karatau ridge. A bronze plaque with a club-shaped figurine was found in one of the complexes.

Interesting, but extremely few in number, are the monuments of different regions of Central Asia, similar to those in the Aral Sea and Tasmolin. This is, first of all, a find in Semirechye, in the Bizhe tract, of a complex of 4 bridles and a pair of bronze pommels. The bits of two bridles with a hole at the base of the stirrup-shaped ring with three-hole cheekpieces, two other bridles with a stop for fixing the cheekpiece and cheekpieces with an oval middle hole. In the Tien Shan, the discovery of a bridle complex on a lake has long been known. Issyk-Kul. A bit with an emphasis for a cheekpiece, a cheekpiece of a peculiar shape with two loops on the reverse side and a middle oval hole for the bit ring. Plaques and conical clasps with a characteristic “knot” pattern. An interesting ring plaque depicts six animals walking in a circle. West along the river. In Talas, on the rocks, a series of petroglyphs was discovered - deer, wild boars, predators, bulls, etc., all depicted in the early Scythian-Siberian style. In the Pamir Mountains, the small burial ground Pamirskaya 1 and several mounds at other points have been explored. The person buried in one mound apparently lay with his head on the saddle (a bronze girth buckle and several belt plaques were found around the skull), and a bridle was placed at the side of his belt. The bit with a hole in the base is stirrup-shaped, the cheekpieces are three-loop. The attachment of the cheekpiece to the bit has been preserved with a strap threaded through the hole in the bit and into the middle loop of the cheekpiece and tied with a knot at both ends. Iron knives and daggers and bronze arrowheads of Tasmolin-Aral types. Bronze plaques are made in the Scythian-Siberian animal style (mountain goat and predator). There is a club-shaped figurine.

The cultural and historical affiliation of the listed monuments and some other, less expressive ones is not yet entirely clear. Some of them, perhaps, should be attributed to the Tasmolin culture. It is possible that in Kazakhstan and Central Asia, over time, several separate close and related cultures will be established, constituting one vast cultural community. Perhaps the steppes of Kazakhstan and Central Asia at the time in question represented a large ethno-cultural region, different from the North Caucasus and steppe Black Sea regions.

The fifth region or region is the steppes and forest-steppes to the west and north of Altai. The main archaeological material here comes mainly from ground burial grounds with relatively poor burial goods. So, in the Western foothills of Altai along the river. Irtysh knows a large series of graves in the vast Zevakino burial ground, close to the monuments of the Bolsherechensk culture on the Upper Ob and near the city of Tomsk. At the same time, there are monuments with a completely Tasmolin appearance (the burials of Kamyshin and Chisty Yar). I have united these two heterogeneous groups of monuments based on their territorial and chronological proximity, but they undoubtedly belong to different ethnic or social groups of the population of the same territory. In general, the western foothills are characterized by bronze plate knives with a ring-shaped pommel, already familiar to us from the Tasmolin knives, and with a semi-ring-shaped pommel (“with an arch on a bracket”), socketed bronze arrowheads with a rhombic feather. There was a three-grooved argillite plaque, a bronze plaque with an image of a predator rolled into a circle, and bronze belt piercings with a club-shaped figure.

On the Upper Ob, a settlement of the Bolsherechensk culture and three ground burial grounds belonging to it were explored. In addition, bronze bits and a pair of pommels with a figure of a deer were accidentally found in the village. Headquarters near Barnaul and at various points - a small series of bronze guns. Judging by these monuments, three-fluted plaques (argillite, bronze, and beaver incisors), bronze socketed arrowheads with a rhombic feather, and daggers with a mushroom-shaped cap and a flat guard, straight or with wings lowered down, were common on the Upper Ob. Such a dagger, found near the city of Biysk, is remarkable, with a spiral shape, like in the North Caucasus (Fig. 7 ), handle ornament.

The monuments in the area of ​​Tomsk and the adjacent part of the Novosibirsk region are very close to the Bolsherechensky ones, now separated into the independent Zavyalovo culture. For our topic, the most interesting is the Tomsk burial ground, the main cultural monument. It is characterized by bronze knives and daggers of the same types as on the Upper Ob and Western Altai. Bronze coins and a rocker-shaped object of unknown purpose, similar to those characteristic of the Bainovsky stage in the steppes of the Minusinsk Basin.

In the sixth region, in Altai, there are several known, usually stone, graves in small burial grounds (Kurtu, Ust-Kuyum, etc.), a fairly large series of deer stones in the southeastern part of the mountain range, as well as petroglyphs and random finds of bronze objects. A riding horse with a bridle was buried in a separate grave built for it, next to the grave of its owner. A bridle without a bit. The cheekpieces, usually horn, are close to those from Arzhan and Chernogorov. Characteristic are long daggers with a mushroom-shaped pommel of the handle and a straight guard, similar to the cross-shaped daggers of the Northern Black Sea region and Ciscaucasia, or with a flat guard, the wings of which have the shape of lowered parallelograms, similar to the third type of daggers of the Northern Black Sea region. Among the random finds, we note a three-fluted argillite plaque and bronze mirrors with a vertical edge on the edge and a flat loop on the reverse side, including the famous Bukhtarma mirror with the image of five deer and a mountain goat in a “tiptoe” pose.

Images of animals in the Scythian-Siberian style are presented in bronze and gold items, on deer stones and in rock paintings. Deer stones, like Tuvan stones, are of the Mongolian type, but not so magnificently decorated with figures of deer and other animals. Usually this is a very laconic image of a warrior, whose image is limited to only some symbols and is sometimes reduced to only three slashes on one side and a ring on the other two, or to a series of dots (a necklace) encircling the upper part of the stone, and three lines above it, etc. .d. On the rocks, silhouette drawings of deer, horses and other animals are shown in a pose standing “on tiptoe” and in a gallop.

In general, the archaeological materials of Altai for the period under review are still completely insufficient and fragmentary. One can only see that this most interesting region of the “steppe Scythian world”, the culture of the early nomads of which is well known from the later famous royal burial mounds of the Pazyryk type, was experiencing the initial phase of development of the culture of the Scythian-Siberian tribes, common to all steppe peoples, but one can only imagine how many We cannot yet get a complete picture of the uniqueness of the Altai tribes of that time that undoubtedly took place.

The seventh region, the Minusinsk steppe basin, has been studied archaeologically better than all other regions of Siberia and Kazakhstan. Fenced off on three sides from the outside world by the difficult-to-pass mountain ranges of Altai and Sayan, the ancient population of the basin consistently developed their culture over many historical periods in unique original forms, preserving their local traditions for centuries and, at the same time, in constant contact with the surrounding nomadic tribes . Still remaining semi-nomadic, with a yailage-type economy, but not nomadic, the ancient population of the period under consideration, here called the Bainov stage of the Tagar culture, had much in common in their culture with the nomadic tribes of the open steppes.

The main source for studying the culture of the Bainovsky stage are burial grounds, each containing up to 20-30 graves of the original structure, and random finds of bronze items. Men and women were buried equally in stone boxes made of massive sandstone slabs. Each grave was surrounded by a small square fence constructed from the same vertically placed slabs. The graves of the clan and tribal nobility were distinguished by their significant size, a more complex structure of the stone burial structure and somewhat richer grave goods. Unlike all other areas, neither the horse nor the harness were buried with the deceased. Weapons and tools other than a knife are rarely found in graves. They are known mainly from random finds. Daggers with a mushroom-shaped or ring pommel of the handle and a flat rectangular guard are typical, and plate knives with a pommel in the form of a ring or half-ring. Bronze coins, similar to the one found in Arzhan, and uniquely shaped coins and axes with a beak-shaped heel were common. There are no finds of bridle sets. Among the random finds there are numerous bits with a stirrup-shaped ring and the same ones with a hole at the base of the stirrup, as in Kazakhstan. The graves contained bronze rocker-shaped objects, similar to those found in the Tomsk burial ground, and three-fluted argillite plaques. There is a small series of images of animals made in the Scythian-Siberian style. These are figurines of a deer and a mountain goat in a “tiptoe” pose on the handles of bronze knives, similar to the Tuvan one from Turan (Fig. 4 ), figures of predators inscribed in a circle, etc.

The eighth region - Tuva - was considered at the beginning of this article mainly based on materials from the Arzhan mound.

The neighboring ninth region - Mongolia - is very poorly explored. A huge number of deer stones and a small number of random finds of bronze items and petroglyphs are known. This is undoubtedly a special area, different from the neighboring ones considered, with somewhat unique forms of the few products so far known to us. The most numerous and varied are deer stones. They were discovered and studied by V.V. Volkov and E.A. Novgorodova there are over 500, but only a small part has been published. Many of them are filled almost over the entire surface with silhouette images of deer, sometimes other animals in a characteristic style, pose and composition. In the same style and in the same poses, but in different compositions, they depicted deer and other animals on the rocks. Mongolia, apparently, was the center for the formation of a magnificent style in monumental art, in images on stone of silhouettes of deer, as well as goats, predators, wild boars and other animals.

but, hopefully, over time they will be discovered, since the collections of “Ordos bronzes” stored in different countries of the world, in museums and in the hands of private owners, contain some things clearly from the Arzhan-Montenegrin circle. Purchased from finders and robbers of ancient graves, they are all without passports, and their origin is not always reliably

walking from Ordos. Let us note only the latest novelty, recently acquired by the National Museum in Tokyo - a collection of bronze knives found in Ordos. Among them there are several that are undoubtedly of interest to us. These are plate knives with a handle that is directly cut off at the top or with a pommel characteristic of Sayan-Altai in the form of a half ring and other shapes. Their handles are decorated on both sides